AARP and the photographers of Magnum Photos look at older people living in new ways around the world in A New Age.

Reply
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
134
Views

OBAMACARE

134 Views
Message 31 of 74

Obamacare was far from perfect, but it changed how we pay for health insurance in a very positive manner. 

  • The large percentage of Americans who have pre-existing conditions, are no longer charged extra for healh insurance. 
  • All important "Preventive Care" is now FREE to patients
  • Low lifes, who can afford health insurance but don't buy it, are now penalized for living off the taxpayer. Wait a second! That was true until the Trump Administration did away with the fabulous "individual mandate".
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
134
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
177
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

177 Views
Message 32 of 74

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:Again - if you want to expand the program for the poor, why involve everyone else. Just expand the existing welfare program.

Because "involving all" in a national single payer health care program like 'Medicare For All' would benefit everyone and bring down the costs of health care while improving the quality of it.


Medicare for all would cost the U.S. $32.6 trillion dollars.  How would you like your income taxes doubled?

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-30/study-medicare-for-all-bill-estimated-at-32-6-tri...


Here's what that study actually said: Medicare for All’ Would Cost $32.6 Trillion Over 10 Years.

 

We ALREADY SPENT $3.4 TRILLION on health care in 2017, and projections are for the amount to grow by AT LEAST 5.5% EVERY YEAR.

 

So, following the Republican lead (do NOTHING EVER) we will spend

$43.8 TRILLION over 10 years

and STILL have 30 million Americans with NO HEALTH INSURANCE

 

Just another reason we must never allow another Republican to win an election if the Nation is to survive - THEY CANNOT DO SIMPLE MATH AND WANT TO RUN OUR ECONOMY!


Using your "simple math" and $3.26 trillion additional each year, each person (assuming 300 million people) would have an additional bill of $10,867.  Of course, liberals will want to push that burden on someone else.  Check out the math.


It's not that simple. Have you even read HR 676 to see where the money comes from?  Obviously you haven't. Employers will pay a tax, taking much of the burden you set at $10,000 per person. Read something before you criticize it. A individual's cost in taxes would be less than they pay for health insurance premiums.


Exactly so Chasky - The Government will simply become an intermediary between the individual and the insurance company, and between the insurance company and the care provider. Everyone will get health care for the same low rates the insurance industry has already negotiated, there will be no bills marked "uncollectable", there will be only one set of forms used for billing and collection greatly reducing overhead, and NOBODY will ever have to argue with their provider or insurance company again over a bill.

 

YOU will still select your own insurance company and pick your own doctor. The only doctors you CAN'T pick are those who will continue to operate "botique practices" where they are like lawyers on retainer - they get money (lots of it) every month from their patients, and then treat them IMMEDIATELY when a problem arrises, or doctors who will simply refuse to accept you.

 

By the way, as an aid to the mathematically challenged:

We spent $3.4 TRILLION for health care in 2017. That amount is projected to continue to increase at at least 5.5% each year, so the next ten years of costs would be: 3.4+3.6+3.8+4.0+4.2+4.4+4.7+4.9+5.2+5.5=$43.7Trillion in 10 years, the cost WITHOUT "Medicare for All" aka Universal Coverage, Single Payer.


For those really math challenged, that works out to be in excess of $10K/year (for 300 million people) for insurance.  Liberals always want a free ride so assuming we use their income tax model (47% paying no tax), the free riders would pay nothing, and the buyer of this new travesty would pay about $20K/year for so so insurance.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
177
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
168
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

168 Views
Message 33 of 74

@williamb39198 wrote:

@rk9152

@NOTHAPPENING

So, trump has no great healthcare plan.

repubs have no plan. 

What is your plan???

Just toss away any assisted healthcare plans away, return to a free market system, and if people can’t afford healthcare, too bad?

 

You criticize current plans, what is your plan?

 

Never Forget

 


It's really quite simple: those that are destitute have Medicaid (free), seniors who worked have Medicare (heavy payments before and after), and those other people either have healthcare coverage through their employer or pay for private insurance.  When one size fits all, then it is costly, inefficient, and doesn't usually cover what's needed.  When you can buy (on the open market) the coverage you want, costs are lower.  One addition, all insurance should be sold across state lines for more competition. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
168
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
171
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

171 Views
Message 34 of 74

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:Again - if you want to expand the program for the poor, why involve everyone else. Just expand the existing welfare program.

Because "involving all" in a national single payer health care program like 'Medicare For All' would benefit everyone and bring down the costs of health care while improving the quality of it.


Medicare for all would cost the U.S. $32.6 trillion dollars.  How would you like your income taxes doubled?

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-30/study-medicare-for-all-bill-estimated-at-32-6-tri...


Here's what that study actually said: Medicare for All’ Would Cost $32.6 Trillion Over 10 Years.

 

We ALREADY SPENT $3.4 TRILLION on health care in 2017, and projections are for the amount to grow by AT LEAST 5.5% EVERY YEAR.

 

So, following the Republican lead (do NOTHING EVER) we will spend

$43.8 TRILLION over 10 years

and STILL have 30 million Americans with NO HEALTH INSURANCE

 

Just another reason we must never allow another Republican to win an election if the Nation is to survive - THEY CANNOT DO SIMPLE MATH AND WANT TO RUN OUR ECONOMY!


Using your "simple math" and $3.26 trillion additional each year, each person (assuming 300 million people) would have an additional bill of $10,867.  Of course, liberals will want to push that burden on someone else.  Check out the math.


It's not that simple. Have you even read HR 676 to see where the money comes from?  Obviously you haven't. Employers will pay a tax, taking much of the burden you set at $10,000 per person. Read something before you criticize it. A individual's cost in taxes would be less than they pay for health insurance premiums.


Exactly so Chasky - The Government will simply become an intermediary between the individual and the insurance company, and between the insurance company and the care provider. Everyone will get health care for the same low rates the insurance industry has already negotiated, there will be no bills marked "uncollectable", there will be only one set of forms used for billing and collection greatly reducing overhead, and NOBODY will ever have to argue with their provider or insurance company again over a bill.

 

YOU will still select your own insurance company and pick your own doctor. The only doctors you CAN'T pick are those who will continue to operate "botique practices" where they are like lawyers on retainer - they get money (lots of it) every month from their patients, and then treat them IMMEDIATELY when a problem arrises, or doctors who will simply refuse to accept you.

 

By the way, as an aid to the mathematically challenged:

We spent $3.4 TRILLION for health care in 2017. That amount is projected to continue to increase at at least 5.5% each year, so the next ten years of costs would be: 3.4+3.6+3.8+4.0+4.2+4.4+4.7+4.9+5.2+5.5=$43.7Trillion in 10 years, the cost WITHOUT "Medicare for All" aka Universal Coverage, Single Payer.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
171
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
166
Views

OBAMACARE

166 Views
Message 35 of 74

This is RK doing what he always does, changing the subject. The issue of Obamacare does not revolve around the Medicaid portion of the plan. Medicaid's been around for decades and was simply incorporated into the ACA.

 

That's not the issue with Obamacare and RK knows it. But he almost always changes the subject when he  he has no other argument.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
166
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
160
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

160 Views
Message 36 of 74

@williamb39198 wrote:

@rk9152

@NOTHAPPENING

So, trump has no great healthcare plan.

repubs have no plan. 

What is your plan???

Just toss away any assisted healthcare plans away, return to a free market system, and if people can’t afford healthcare, too bad?

 

You criticize current plans, what is your plan?

 

Never Forget

 


Don't you read? I have posted over and over again that there is a program for the poor called Medicaid. If it needs fixing - fix it. There is no need to roll everyone into one big bureaucratic system.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
160
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
162
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

162 Views
Message 37 of 74

@rk9152

@NOTHAPPENING

So, trump has no great healthcare plan.

repubs have no plan. 

What is your plan???

Just toss away any assisted healthcare plans away, return to a free market system, and if people can’t afford healthcare, too bad?

 

You criticize current plans, what is your plan?

 

Never Forget

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
162
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
177
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

177 Views
Message 38 of 74

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

 


Again - if you want to expand the program for the poor, why involve everyone else. Just expand the existing welfare program.


Because "involving all" in a national single payer health care program like 'Medicare For All' would benefit everyone and bring down the costs of health care while improving the quality of it.


Medicare is for seniors and people who have contributed for many years. How does "for all" fit into that? 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
177
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
173
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

173 Views
Message 39 of 74

@Olderscout66 wrote:

 


@rk9152 wrote:

@CriticalThinking wrote:

Once again, RK was dead wrong when he said about Obamacare, "a program exists for the poor".

 

Obamacare does not target the poor. Here are the people who derive the greatest benefit from Obamacare.

  • Those who work for companies who do not provide health insurance
  • Those who work for companies who did provide health insurance, but they were laid off and lost their coverage.
  • Here's a big one, the SELF EMPLOYED

The self-employed are unable to provide for their needs all of a sudden???

 


Not "all of a sudden" - it happened over decades as Republicans blocked every effort to control health care costs including health insurance.

 

In 1960, the cost of health care for the average worker was $146/year and his income was $4,292 so health care took 3% of his income. In 2016 the Republicans had allowed the average cost to grow to $10,348 and held wages down to $51,939 making health care consume 20% of a workers wages.

 

The end game for the GOPerLords was to enslave workers to their employer by making it impossible for them to leave a job for fear of losing their health coverage. If not true, then WHY DID REPUBLICANS DO IT?


You seem to forget that it is the Dems that want to control more and more. The Reps have no interest in DOING THAT STUFF. The economy changed on a world wide basis over a period of many years. IT WASN'T THE REAGAN TAX CUTS. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
173
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
175
Views

Re: OBAMACARE

175 Views
Message 40 of 74

Did anyone answer your question, rker, why a Texas judge can rule it unconstitutional when the Supreme Court ruled it’s constitutional?

 

The Supreme Court ruling was based on the power to tax. Since the tax law just invalidated the tax penalty for those who are uninsured, the judge is claiming there is no longer power to regulate under Congress’ power to tax.

 

obamacare affects everyone who has insurance. Those with employer-provided plans as well. If this ruling holds, nobody has to cover your emergency room visits, preexisitng conditions, kids up to 26, maternity and well baby care, etc. 

 

It affects everyone.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
175
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have a question about AARP membership or benefits? Ask it in the AARP Help Membership forum, Benefits & Discounts forum, or General forum.


multiple white question marks with center red question mark

Top Authors